Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board v. Graff
This text of 321 N.W.2d 53 (Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board v. Graff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant, Judge of the Aitkin County Court, fired his probation officer by order pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 260.311, subd. 1(1) (1978), which provides for court appointment of probation officers “to serve during the pleasure of the court.” Respondent, Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board, established by Aitkin and five other counties under Minn.Stat. § 401.01 et seq. (1978) (Community Corrections Act) and Minn. Stat. § 471.59 (1978) (Joint Powers Act), sought a declaratory judgment that appel-. lant’s order be declared void in violation of respondent’s and its employees’ contractual and statutory employment rights. The trial court, upon stipulated facts, found appellant’s order invalid as “contrary to the employment agreement and collective bargaining agreement that exists between [the probation officer] and his employer Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board.”
Affirmance of the trial court ruling is controlled by General Drivers, Local # 346, for Itself and on Behalf of Dennis Murdock v. Aitkin County Board, et al., 320 N.W.2d 695 (Minn.1982). A county court’s authority to discharge probation officers under section 260.311, subd. 1(1) is modified by Minn.Stat. § 179.63, subd. 4 (1980) and is subject to the employee’s rights under the collective bargaining agreement negotiated pursuant to the Public Employees Labor Relations Act.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
321 N.W.2d 53, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1621, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arrowhead-regional-corrections-board-v-graff-minn-1982.